Significant Property News & Discussions

[teddybear]

I think this is a joke! Banks on brinks of failing, and the fault has been blamed on the depositors?! It seems that the banks are speculating with depositors money, over-leveraged, suffered from failed Greece bonds investment etc which has been sliced by the same people who now say depositors need to shoulder the responsibility for the banks failing!



Business News
Eurogroup chief faces heavy flak over Cyprus deal

The head of the Eurozone finance ministers Jeroen Dijsselbloem (AFP/ANP/File/Evert-Jan Daniels)

BRUSSELS: Two months into the job as head of Eurozone finance ministers, Jeroen Dijsselbloem's handling of the Cyprus bailout and his suggestion it might apply elsewhere have sparked sharp questions over the Dutchman's readiness for the post.

The 43-year-old Dijsselbloem was on the rack Tuesday after controversial decisions to wind up Laiki (Popular Bank) and to hit large depositors at Bank of Cyprus with hefty losses in a re-negotiated rescue deal reached early Monday.

In interviews afterwards, Dijsselbloem suggested that the Cyprus approach, with its "bail-in" provision for depositors above 100,000 euros (Us$129,000), could be used again to avoid having taxpayers carry the burden, as they have done up now in the three-year old crisis.

"Taking away the risk from the financial sector and taking it on to the public shoulders is not the right approach," Dijsselbloem said.

"If we want to have a healthy, sound financial sector, the only way is to say: 'Look, there where you take the risks, you must deal with them, and if you can't deal with them you shouldn't have taken them on and the consequence might be that it is end of story."

That final comment sent global markets into a tailspin. Currency analysts Moneycorp labelled Dijsselbloem "a loose cannon" responsible for 13 billion euros being wiped off the value of Eurozone financial companies in a day.

While his office testily rejected suggestions that he was suggesting any "template" for possible new bailouts, the damage was done.

Veteran predecessor and Luxembourg Premier Jean-Claude Juncker had already criticised what he said was a botched initial attempt to impose a levy on all Cyprus bank deposits, including those below 100,000 euros, which are supposed to be protected under EU law.

And on Monday, a senior EU adviser, echoing the thoughts of many, said Dijsselbloem's interview slip was a "communication error ... but what an error it was."

Financial analysts were equally unforgiving.

ING credit strategist Jeroen van den Broek said the Eurogroup chairman must show that he understands "the full weight, meaning and context of the words 'bail-in, resolution framework, subordinated, senior, covered bond, hybrid capital, secured, unsecured ... and even deposit'."

Erik Nielsen, chief economist with UniCredit Research, highlighted what he saw as "hypocrisy" just weeks after the Dutch government nationalised SNS Reaal, "saving its depositors and others at the expense of Dutch pensioners and other taxpayers."

Dijsselbloem stood his ground Tuesday, telling Dutch newspaper Volkskrant the fresh euro-crisis uncertainty was whipped up by "journalists, politicians and opinion makers."

He told the daily that Juncker apologised after calling the idea of taxing all savings a "deficient" decision, basically "because I wasn't there."

It was "intended as a joke," said Dijsselbloem.

"I don't feel damaged - on the contrary, it has strengthened me," he added.

The finance minister, meanwhile, was not entirely without support.

Sharon Bowles, who chairs the European Parliament's economics committee, had been critical of him over a first Cyprus bailout, agreed March 16.

But Bowles told AFP on Tuesday it was mischievous to attribute the market wipe-out entirely to his remarks.

Dijsselbloem had "behaved honourably and competently" by "not sneaking round the (deposit) guarantee" during their meetings, she said.

"He took it on the chin, as he did so in a fairly robust private session we had," she said.

"The fact is, bank resolution has now entered the sovereign bailout toolbox - that tool is being used, sharpened, and we will see it again," Bowles said.

"Yes, (Dijsselbloem) needs more ringcraft - but I give him points for being honest ... I think, in the end, he'll get there."

-AFP/fl

[DKSG]

When money is no longer safe in the National Bank, the only way is for the rich to uproot themselves and move elsewhere.

Guess where ?

DKSG

[thomastansb]

When a country and its banks get downgraded to almost junk status, people should be sensible enough to move all their money out from the country. Or at least 90% of their money.

But they deserve it. They keep borrowing and spend like no tomorrow. Serve them right. I remember when I was working in Europe about 7 years back, people were praising the European system for high salary, high pension, early retirement, unemployment benefits, free healthcare, free schooling etc. Now the can of worms is opened.

[phantom_opera]

When money is no longer safe in the National Bank, the only way is for the rich to uproot themselves and move elsewhere.

Guess where ?

DKSG

not just Asia, plenty of choice like Nordic countries, but most likely not in cash but hard assets

Sweden property price



Norway



we must send our BTO lemmings to Europe to experience high housing prices then they learn to shut up

[eng81157]

When a country and its banks get downgraded to almost junk status, people should be sensible enough to move all their money out from the country. Or at least 90% of their money.

But they deserve it. They keep borrowing and spend like no tomorrow. Serve them right. I remember when I was working in Europe about 7 years back, people were praising the European system for high salary, high pension, early retirement, unemployment benefits, free healthcare, free schooling etc. Now the can of worms is opened.

the EU bloc is geared towards having its member states enjoy economic growth but leaves no exit plan if things turn bad. if cyprus wasn't part of EU, she could have done an argentina easily

[teddybear]

Repost below here for archive...

---------------
Back to the case about why rich men and high-income earners are getting better deal with below policies:
1) Income tax and corporate tax reduced from 25% to 20%
2) Estate duties abolished
3) GST implemented to make up for the short-falls due to (1) & (2).

Now, assuming a high-income earners (or businessmen) earning $10m a year.

Because of (1) above, he saved $500k a year in income taxes.

Because of (2), his wealth will not be taxed when he passed on to his children (contrary to what our minister saying that the way forward is to tax wealth, and yet the removed the very grandfather scheme, i.e. estate duty, that really tax wealth! So, isn't time for them to bring back the same old estate duty?! ).

Now, people will say, rich people pay more GSTs wah. Well, they earn $10m a year, but there is a limit to what they can consume. So, most likely they only spend $1m a year on family expenses (say they do so before GST of 7% implemented), and after 7% GST they pay GST of $70k.

Wow, because of (1) & (3), they have a net savings of $430k in taxes!
Oh my, I have not even mentioned that they will not even spend all $1m in Singapore, so the GST they pay is even less!

----------------------------
Next, we compare to the poor middle-income earner, say earning $100k a year.

Because of (1), they probably save 1% in tax or $1k a year.

They don't benefit from (2).

Now, with 7% GST, how much they pay in taxes for GST? Most middle income earners spent most of their money on living, most likely about $70k a year on their family expenses (say before GST implemented). After GST implemented, they will need to pay GST taxes of $4900 a year.

Wow! The poor middle income earners are now slapped with additional taxes of $3900 a year!

So, as we see, over the past few years, the tax changes actually favoured the rich and made them save more taxes vs the poor middle income earners who are made to pay more taxes!
Is these tax changes progressive?
What is "progressive"? Is "progressive" good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by teddybear
I'm 100% disagree with you!

Your view is superficial and you have overlooked the costs incurred due to gst.

Though gst registered business can claim back gst, however, they still need to set up a system to administer this. A whole replacement of new system as opposed to status quote. In addition, they need to hire more stuffs to administer n do papers to track n claim. All these additional costs are real and they are going to pass down to consumer!

Imagine the whole supply chain! The accumulated costs are significant!

Some company has voluntarily GST registered, you thought they will not keep that 7% gst and treated it as additional admin cost incurred?

In conclusion, The nett effect of GST or consumption tax does add pressure to inflation once it was implenemted.

Also, the collection of GST is NOT a trade off for other taxes such as property tax, income tax etc etc etc. Regardless of what types of taxes or gst, all texas are to increase business costs and hence inflation.

Just to throw you some figure for all to see:
Rich Man earned 10M a year.
Based on previous income tax of 25%, he needs to pay about 2.5M
Tax reduced to 20%, he just needs to pay about 2M. In order to pay 500k gst so that his total taxes are the same as 2.5M, he needs to consume at least 7M of goods or services in Singapore! You think this is possible. The Richmen are more likely to spend their monies oversea. You just save 500k for them to spend more oversea!

Gst benifts Richmen more than majority upper middle income! In Singapore, middle income and upper middle income are being squeezed

The government introduced GST rebates for the poor. The nett effect was that the poor was not quite affected by the introduction of GST during the introduction stage.

GST registered businesses are not affected by GST as it is a consumption tax. The collection of GST is a trade off for other taxes such as property tax, income tax etc etc etc. Such taxes are more likely to increase business costs and hence inflation.

The nett effect of GST or consumption tax does not add pressure to inflation once it is implenemted and passed that stage.

[teddybear]

Repost below here for archive...

---------------

I can also google, but can't find anybody to support what you said! Seems like what you said is your person opinion? Who would believe your personal opinion which you said as though they are time-and-trusted economic theory? Are you some famous economists whose economic theory has been time-and-implementation tested? Many economists, even Nobel Prize winners, their economic theories are not even time-and-implementation tested, not to say you?

And the LTCM saga, they are the worlds' brightest economists andNobel Prize winners in economics. What happened with their own LTCM? Bankrupt! Their economic theories which garnered them Nobel Prize have been proven to be rubbish by the real market!

The answers you are looking for can be found if you google.

I will not response if people are not here wanting to learn but to disagree for the sake of disagreeing.

teddybear
Which economist say that government can effectively take back the money after they have printed, circulated and flooded the markets a lot of cheap monies! Which famous economist says that printing cheap monies will not cause inflation? US dont worry about inflation but they worry about deflation. That's why keep PRINTING money.

At least, I know developers, housing agents, those vested investors are Correct since 2009 !!
Wow, they r right >4 yrs n r still counting!

[teddybear]

Repost below here for archive & for the benefits of all who bother to check the difference and know the difference, that Singapore 7% GST is much more than the 20% VAT in UK for most of the middle-income families!!!
Of course lah, even if VAT increases to 40%, the impact on inflation of middle-income families in UK is still so much negligible compared to Singapore raising GST by even 1% !!!

You are NOT a good researcher at all. First and foremost, before you even buy in the whole concept and idea, please check what is their VAT components n basis in the article. Your understand is flawed and better appreciate me as a good teacher to educate you and pointing out your mistake.

First of all, Singapore GST didnt have any exemption for all necessities which constitue majority of the costs if not all. People in western world can avoid the luxury items if they don't have any money or poor. However, all those neccessities items like healthcare, medication, basic foods and clothing and children goods are all exempted from VAT. Of course, the inflation due to vat is insignificant to them if they don't buy luxury items.


However, there is not exemption to all these basic neccessities such as children foods, healthcare, medication, basic foods and clothing in Singapore. Also, your article is very the old la with data from 40 years ago for same. At that time, all the items are very low and a fraction of it would be low too. Please ask IMF to conduct a new reaserch now for Singapore.

For the benifit of other foruners who want to learn.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeds
April 16, 2005

An oft-voiced concern in countries introducing value-added tax is that the introduction of the tax would set in motion a spiral in which tax, prices and wages would feed on each other -- that is, VAT would be inflationary.
If the inflationary impact is taken to mean a sustained increase in the rate of inflation then the concern would be conceptually misguided. The introduction of VAT, or any tax for that matter, can never, by itself, lead to a sustained increase in the rate of change in the price level.
Such a change in the inflation rate can only be produced by an expansionary monetary policy under all circumstances. If, however, the term is interpreted as an increase in the price level (or a one-period increase in the inflation rate), then whether VAT is inflationary in this sense would depend on a number of factors.

The Crisis Over VAT: Complete Coverage

Consider, some examples of VAT in other countries. After VAT was first introduced, a survey was conducted by Alan S Tait on its impact in several countries on the basis of International Monetary Fund data, which shows that VAT is never introduced in isolation.
There are a number of variables influencing price change, and therefore, it is difficult to empirically assess the effect of VAT on prices. The impact of VAT on prices, therefore, cannot be strictly segregated from the general trend in inflation. First, the taxes that have been replaced are also relevant. They could be a wholesale sales tax of the cascading type, a simpler VAT, a multistage ring system, a cascade production tax and so on.
Second, the design to yield equal or higher revenue also makes a difference.
Third, other concurrent changes such as rise in oil or steel prices in international and internal markets, increase in utility rates, changes in wage levels, administrative changes such as tighter monetary policy, price control, monitoring of prices and so on, make due impact on the price rise.
According to the survey, in 22 countries, no major impact on the consumer price index was identified.
In another eight, the introduction of VAT was associated with a highly defined once and for all shift in the consumer price index; only in one of these cases it could be said to have accelerated the rate of increase of the consumer price index.
In seven other cases, although the shift was permanent there was no acceleration in the rate of change in prices attributable to VAT.
Therefore, in 29 cases (22 plus seven) -- 83 per cent of the total sample -- the introduction of VAT did not alter the rate of price change.
Price control measures can be used effectively to dampen the potential price-wage acceleration of inflation after the introduction of VAT -- some good examples are Austria, France, Korea, Norway and the Netherlands.
Perhaps the most important conclusion of the survey is that there seems to be nothing inherently inflationary about the use of VAT. In 33 out of 41 cases reviewed -- over 80 per cent -- (the "shift" cases and the "little or no effect" cases), VAT was not a contributory factor to inflation.
There is another empirical study on the Netherlands on the issue of price rise. The Central Planning Bureau in the Netherlands calculated the price effect of VAT from 1969 to 1980.
While VAT was introduced in the country in 1970, the study goes up to 1980 and the trend in price rise due to VAT can clearly be seen as insignificant, or none at all.
In Indonesia, there were widespread apprehensions of substantial price rise before VAT was introduced in April 1985. However, in practice nothing like that happened.
In fact, price indexes for consumer products fell slightly in the first week after adoption of VAT, and domestic inflation for the subsequent year was well below that for the previous year.
It is evident from the discussion that inflation had not surfaced in the countries under the study, which cover a cross section of countries from the world over, because of VAT alone.
There may be a minor one-shot increase or once and for all impact to begin with under certain circumstances due to replacing other taxes and consequent adjustments by the traders and also because the overall number of tax payers would increase, but the crucial question is whether this one time increase would lead to further price escalation.
There would be offsetting price effects because of the elimination of the cascading tax. The media has reported that some sellers of consumer durable goods have said that the 12.5 per cent rate is higher than the previous one.
They are suppressing the fact that now the manufacturers shall be getting input credit for the sales tax paid on the raw materials and machinery.
Moreover, 4 per cent is lower than most of the existing rates. So the overall VAT rate will prove to be the same as the effective rate prevailing before.
The net price effect of VAT would be nil. If the VAT is an equal-yield tax, and that is how it has been designed to be in India, there would not be any effect on the overall price change, although there may be changes in relative prices.
The tax being revenue neutral, the aggregate demand is unchanged and so there would be no impact on the aggregate price level. There is unanimity among the economists all over the world that there seems to be nothing inherently inflationary about the use of VAT.
Thus, this brings us to another aspect related to VAT administration, that is, the potentially inflationary effect can be constrained by government policies to inform the public and traders about the expected effect of VAT on prices, the use of price controls, monitoring of prices, offsetting adjustment in other taxes and generous provisions to ensure full credit for previously paid taxes on inputs.
One can criticise VAT for other reasons, but it cannot be called inflationary.
Powered by

[teddybear]

Nothing to do with property, but don't know where to post, so post here.

Road rage jailed for 1 month!

Wait a minute, wasn't there another road rage case that the man only get fined? Why so much difference hah? Anybody knows what are the differences in these 2 cases so much so that 1 get only fine and while another (in below case) get 1 month jail (so big difference)?



Businessman appealing against one month's jail sentence for road rage



By Elena Chong
The Straits Times
Friday, May 10, 2013
SINGAPORE - Edwin Jaykumar Samuel, 38, a businessman, punched a technician in a road rage case and was sentenced to one month's jail on Friday.

[proud owner]

Nothing to do with property, but don't know where to post, so post here.

Road rage jailed for 1 month!

Wait a minute, wasn't there another road rage case that the man only get fined? Why so much difference hah? Anybody knows what are the differences in these 2 cases so much so that 1 get only fine and while another (in below case) get 1 month jail (so big difference)?



Businessman appealing against one month's jail sentence for road rage



By Elena Chong
The Straits Times
Friday, May 10, 2013
SINGAPORE - Edwin Jaykumar Samuel, 38, a businessman, punched a technician in a road rage case and was sentenced to one month's jail on Friday.

same for road accident ...

man knocked down pedestrian ... stopped to help and sent him to hospital..but died along the way .. he was jailed .. lost his job etc ..

NUS girl knocked down pedestrian ... drove off .. told her Mom abt it and asked her mom to report to police and lied that mom was the driver ..
Her father found out .. they went back to accident area .. man already died ..

guess what ..she was let off ..with a warning

[teddybear]

MyPaper (May 2013) - 住八楼以上早死风险少22%

[minority]

Repost below here for archive...

---------------
Back to the case about why rich men and high-income earners are getting better deal with below policies:
1) Income tax and corporate tax reduced from 25% to 20%
2) Estate duties abolished
3) GST implemented to make up for the short-falls due to (1) & (2).

as usual crap again... give us a break. from the bs.

[teddybear]

Please tell us your opinion about below facts:


"Repost below here for archive & for the benefits of all who bother to check the difference and know the difference, that Singapore 7% GST is much more than the 20% VAT in UK for most of the middle-income families!!!
Of course lah, even if VAT increases to 40%, the impact on inflation of middle-income families in UK is still so much negligible compared to Singapore raising GST by even 1% !!! "

as usual crap again... give us a break. from the bs.

[teddybear]

You are right to point out that I made a mistake, so I corrected it as below:

Back to the case about why rich men and high-income earners are getting better deal with below policies:
1) Top-tier Income tax reduced from 33% to 20% and corporate tax reduced from 30% to 17%
2) Estate duties abolished
3) GST implemented from 0% to 7% to make up for the short-falls due to (1) & (2).

as usual crap again... give us a break. from the bs.

Originally Posted by teddybear
Repost below here for archive...

---------------
Back to the case about why rich men and high-income earners are getting better deal with below policies:
1) Income tax and corporate tax reduced from 25% to 20%
2) Estate duties abolished
3) GST implemented to make up for the short-falls due to (1) & (2).

[teddybear]

Published June 08, 2013
The 'one per cent problem' - fact, not hype
By vikram khanna








NOT AN EMPTY SLOGAN
The 'We are the 99 per cent' slogan of the Occupy Wall Street movement was not an empty one, nor was it as hyperbolic as it sounds. - PHOTO: AP







Singapore
THE catchy slogan "We are the 99 per cent" adopted by the Occupy Wall Street movement that sprouted after the global financial crisis to protest against economic unfairness was not an empty one. Nor indeed was it as hyperbolic as it sounds. Recent economic research confirms that many countries have what the Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz describes as the "one per cent problem".
Consider these statistics culled from his new book The Price of Inequality:

• Over the last three decades, the top one per cent of wage earners in the United States have enjoyed wage increases of about 250 per cent. The bottom 90 per cent have seen wage growth of only around 15 per cent (The top 0.1 per cent did the best of all, enjoying more than 300 per cent increases).
• From 2002-07 - the boom years that preceded the global financial crisis - the top one per cent of income earners seized more than 65 per cent of the gain in total national income.
• The top one per cent earned 93 per cent of the additional income created in the US in 2010 (compared to 2009) - which suggests that inequality has, if anything, worsened after the global financial crisis.
• The wealthiest one per cent have 225 times the wealth of the average American, almost double the proportion in 1983.

While these numbers apply to the United States, similar trends have been found for some other countries, including Singapore.

[teddybear]

Wah! $1,500 per month rent for a semi-D! So cheap! Landed property rentals are so cheap?!


Family skips on rent, turns violent and resist arrest
Police were called in after a family of four refused to pay 2 months rent and barred their landlord and police from entering the rental house. -AsiaOne

Fri, Jun 07, 2013
AsiaOne


SINGAPORE - A woman who refused to pay up two months of rent ended up in a stand-off with police officers on Thursday afternoon, resulting in the arrest of her three children who had behaved violently towards them.


The incident at a Paya Lebar Crescent semi-detached bungalow began at about 4pm.


According to Shin Min Daily Evening News, the landlord, identified as Madam Qiu, 55, called the police after her tenants, a single mother who is unemployed, and her three teenage children, 2 boys aged 17 and 12, and a girl, aged 16, after they failed to pay their arrears.
They also refused to move out, despite Madam Qiu's request for them to do so. She eventually called the police, but the family locked themselves inside the house.
At 5.10pm, the Singapore Civil Defence (SCDF) received a call to break open the entrance to the house. Nine police officers were seen entering the house with protective shields.
A teenage girl became agitated upon seeing the officers. As she screamed at them, she struck and kicked at the police shields. A female police officer managed to subdue her after a brief struggle.
The two boys also resisted arrest. The older boy put up a violent struggle, but six police officers managed to subdue him. Both boys were handcuffed and taken to the police station.
The mother, who did not put up resistance, was not arrested. But she was seen running after her children as they were led to a waiting police car. She was heard screaming: "Don't take away my children!"
According to the Chinese evening daily, this is the not the first time the family had a stand-off.



Handcuffed
When queried by the media, the police said the teens, including the 12-year-old boy, were handcuffed to ensure their security and that of the officers at the scene.
The two boys had refused to cooperate with the police when asked to go to the police station for questioning.
They had behaved in a threatening manner towards the officers, said the police.
The girl was arrested because she had verbally abused and attacked police officers during the stand-off.

Tenants did not pay rent
According to Madam Qiu, the family of four had not paid rent amounting to $3,000 for the past two months.
She had previously cut off water and electricity supplies to the house twice in a bid to get them to move out. She resorted to doing this again yesterday morning, but the family still refused to budge.
Before this incident, they had paid rent for January and February, together with a deposit.
Madam Qiu told Shin Min that the police had to force their way into the house as her tenants locked themselves in and refused entry to her.
The older brother had also threatened Madam Qiu on May 22, when she went to take measurements of the family's water usage. She made a police report for that too.
When Shin Min interviewed the older brother, he said the family decided to discontinue paying rent as they believed that Madam Qiu was not the rightful owner of the property.
He added that the family had paid two months of rent plus a deposit equivalent to a month's rent.
This amounted to $4,500.
He said: "We asked to see (Madam Qiu's) title deed to prove she was the owner of the house, but she refused. So we decided not to pay her rent for April and May."
To refute his claim, Madam Qiu showed Shin Min's reporter documents to prove she is indeed the owner.


Not the first time
This is the not first time the family is in the news for not paying rent.
According to a Shin Min report in November 2011, the same family had rented a semi-detached house in Siglap for $2,600 a month. But they stopped paying rent after 2 months and owed $31,200 in arrears.
In that incident, they also refused to allow houseowner to enter the premises, resulting in a 6-hour stand-off.

[star]

Newspapers should publish her photo. It will serve as a warning to all landlords.

[kane]

See title deed? If mortgage with bank how to see? This tenant trying to be funny. Go INLIS system can see straightaway who's the owner. Unless they disclose the identity of this tenant, the moral is don't rent your property to a single mum with 3 teenage kids.

[ysyap]

For the kids to be violent and aggressive towards police officer is evident of a lack of proper parental guidance because of their apparent disrespect for the authorities.

For the arrears to accumulate to S$31.2k @ S$2.6k/mth, that earlier landlord had been putting up with them for an entire year. Wah... very patient and trusting man...

[felicia_sg]

Moral of the story? If the tenant is late in payment by even 1 week, chase them.
If late by 1 month, can start process to chase them out!

For the kids to be violent and aggressive towards police officer is evident of a lack of proper parental guidance because of their apparent disrespect for the authorities.

For the arrears to accumulate to S$31.2k @ S$2.6k/mth, that earlier landlord had been putting up with them for an entire year. Wah... very patient and trusting man...

[ysyap]

Moral of the story? If the tenant is late in payment by even 1 week, chase them.
If late by 1 month, can start process to chase them out!

I would even wait for 1 wk. After 3 days late without prior notification, I'll already start chasing. Some tenants, if they know you are Mr/Ms nice guy/gal, will makan you to the core, cooking up different reasons to delay payment, etc. If you are v strict, they might be more on task in payment and meeting deadlines. I have one tenant who begged for payment to be made at the end of the month instead of beginning of the month and has thought that after so long, the norm is end of the month payment... Good thing I still remember!

[Rosy]

Moral of the story? If the tenant is late in payment by even 1 week, chase them.
If late by 1 month, can start process to chase them out!

Send a reminder via sms and email when payment is late by 3days.

And I will start giving them 1month notice of repossession once they are late for more than 7days.

[teddybear]

Take a peek at the NEA PSI data and saw the following (see pic).
Not surprised to see that Central has the lowest PSI & PM2.5 readings!

The North (Woodlands, Sembawang, ...) and South are the mostly badly hit (Marina Bays, HarbourFront, Telok Blangah, Pasir Panjang, ...)

[teddybear]

Checking the PSI data again this morning 20 Jun 2013 (see attached pic)..................
Not surprised to see that Central still has the lowest PSI & PM2.5 readings (and by a margin of 15-20+%!) while the South, North & West have the worst readings!
The air has been cleansed by people living in those areas...

Take a peek at the NEA PSI data and saw the following (see pic).
Not surprised to see that Central has the lowest PSI & PM2.5 readings!

The North (Woodlands, Sembawang, ...) and South are the mostly badly hit (Marina Bays, HarbourFront, Telok Blangah, Pasir Panjang, ...)

[teddybear]

Wow! They didn't read CondoSingapore somebody here said got cheap chicken rice at $1.50 per plate! What different to find cheap hawker food? He telling lie or this somebody here telling lie?


Tougher to find cheap hawker food



Chong Yee Lim | My Paper | Thu Apr 18 2013



The likelihood of being charged more for five common dishes has gone up at hawker centres and coffee shops here.
Singapore, April 18, 2013
SINGAPORE -Bad news for people who like to eat out: The likelihood of being charged more for five common dishes has gone up at hawker centres and coffee shops here.
For instance, 54.4 per cent of vendors sold plain roti prata last year at or below the most popular price of 80 cents, down from 88 per cent in 2011.
This was the biggest shift in the number of vendors selling pricier dishes, based on the results of a survey released by the Consumers Association of Singapore yesterday.
The survey, which polled 541 stalls in December last year, focused on five dishes: Chicken nasi briyani, non-halal chicken rice, fishball noodles, plain roti prata, and mixed-vegetable rice with two selections of vegetables and one selection of meat.
Despite more hawkers offering pricier dishes, the most popular prices - or mode prices - for three dishes remained the same last year from 2011. Chicken nasi briyani was still $4.50, non-halal chicken rice was $2.50 and plain roti prata was 80 cents.
But fishball noodles' most popular price was $3, up from $2.50, and mixed-vegetable rice costs $2.90, up from $2.50.
DBS economist Irvin Seah attributed the price increases to rising costs of rentals faced by wholesalers, ingredients and labour.
"Labour costs have been rising because of the tight domestic labour market," he said.
He said that the Singapore Rental Index has been "rising across various segments of the property market, compared to previous years". This meant wholesalers, who provide food ingredients to hawkers, had to pay more for rental, and these costs were passed down to the hawkers.
Mr Victor Thya, the secretary of the Marine Parade Merchants' Association which represents more than 50 hawker stalls, said that stall-rental costs have remained stable. So, one reason for hawkers raising prices is the wholesalers' rising expenses, he said.
Mr Thya, 47, who runs three stalls at a Marine Parade Central hawker centre, said the cost of transporting watermelons from wholesalers has gone up.
So, he has to pay wholesalers $1.30 per kilogram of watermelons delivered now, instead of 90 cents last year.
"We do our best to keep our prices the same as before, despite the rise in costs. However, we are not sure how long we can keep this up," he said.
[email protected]

[teddybear]

Jurong West condo, The Centris, residents irked by serial vandal




AsiaOne | Friday, Jun 28, 2013
SINGAPORE - Residents of a Jurong West condominium are irked by a serial vandal who have struck repeatedly for more than a year.
Numerous residents have had their car tyres punctured by screws. They initially thought that the punctures came from driving on roads, but the repeated punctures and similar fates suffered by their neighbours raised their suspicions.
According to a resident, more than 40 residents of The Centris condominium have had their cars vandalised in the condo's private carpark, which is accessible by members of the public.
Most of the incidents involve screws being driven into the tyres of their vehicles. Other incidents include car headlights being smashed, scratches on the body work and glue on car bonnets.
The resident said that although the building's management have installed more closed-circuit television cameras, the vandalism has not stopped. He has not given his name as he fears reprisals.
He also said that the police have started investigating the matter since May this year.
According to The Straits Times, residents have lodged separate police reports and taken their woes to Jurong Point Shopping Centre's management, which oversees the 610-unit condo.

[teddybear]

Watch out for falling fish tail, tea bag, toilet paper...brick!



Eunice Toh and Abigail Goh | The New Paper | Friday, May 10, 2013
SINGAPORE - It's even raining bricks at this HDB carpark.
Every other day for the past year, someone has been throwing objects - fish tails, tea bags, balls of toilet paper and tissue, and now bricks - from Block 222, Serangoon Avenue 4.
Just three weeks ago, someone threw bricks which landed in the open-air carpark next to the block, smashing parts of the windscreens of a lorry and a car.
A police report was made but the culprit was not found.
On Tuesday morning, it happened again and a parked taxi was damaged.
The noise woke some residents, including Mrs Anjamal Navalingam, who lives on the 10th floor.
The 58-year-old housewife heard two loud crashes at about 4am and went to her kitchen window to investigate, but did not see the culprit or where the bricks had been thrown from.
She added that the bricks could have been hers. She uses them with her potted plants in the common corridor and discovered two of them missing on Tuesday morning.

[DKSG]

Office Boy not only go to showflats ...
He is also very much aware of the happenings in the country.

I observed that in recent years, humility and morality of the average person in this country is dropping faster the PSI in the past week!

The root cause is maybe due to the fact that with the huge influx of immigrants richer than the native Singaporeans, people are feeling disgruntled... What they think they can have in the past is now no longer reachable by them ...

On the other hand, for the immigrants, some maybe considered top percentile in their country, but when they come here, they can only stay in HDB ... So also very the unhappy ...

I shan't talk too much here or give solutions to these problems ... Coz I am just a lowly Office Boy ...

DKSG

[teddybear]

Sad indeed.
So if can afford, better buy high-end condos and landed better... Don't try to save some money buying cheap-skate condos and landed and try to get bigger space for less money because you will then end up quarreling with neighbours over parking space outside your house (for landed) or over allocation of parking lots (for condos), cars getting vandalized for nothing, cars hit with falling bricks (Ops!) etc!

Office Boy not only go to showflats ...
He is also very much aware of the happenings in the country.

I observed that in recent years, humility and morality of the average person in this country is dropping faster the PSI in the past week!

The root cause is maybe due to the fact that with the huge influx of immigrants richer than the native Singaporeans, people are feeling disgruntled... What they think they can have in the past is now no longer reachable by them ...

On the other hand, for the immigrants, some maybe considered top percentile in their country, but when they come here, they can only stay in HDB ... So also very the unhappy ...

I shan't talk too much here or give solutions to these problems ... Coz I am just a lowly Office Boy ...

DKSG

[mosaic]

Office Boy not only go to showflats ...
He is also very much aware of the happenings in the country.

I observed that in recent years, humility and morality of the average person in this country is dropping faster the PSI in the past week!

The root cause is maybe due to the fact that with the huge influx of immigrants richer than the native Singaporeans, people are feeling disgruntled... What they think they can have in the past is now no longer reachable by them ...

On the other hand, for the immigrants, some maybe considered top percentile in their country, but when they come here, they can only stay in HDB ... So also very the unhappy ...

I shan't talk too much here or give solutions to these problems ... Coz I am just a lowly Office Boy ...

DKSG

You know there s a problem with the country and the people when people are bashing each other up over a stuffed toy.